Nexstar Media Group urged a federal judge in Sacramento to deny requests for a preliminary injunction against its completed acquisition of TEGNA Inc., arguing that blocking the deal would harm local television stations and viewers across the country while offering no immediate protection to cable and satellite providers. The filing, submitted on April 1, 2026, in the consolidated antitrust cases brought by DIRECTV and a coalition of states, described the merger as already closed and positioned the injunction request as an attempt to disrupt ongoing operations rather than address genuine competitive threats.
The companies combined to operate 259 television stations in 132 designated market areas after completing required divestitures, representing about 15 percent of all full-power broadcast stations nationwide. Nexstar maintained that the transaction would generate roughly 300 million dollars in annual synergies, primarily in the first year, allowing expanded investment in local news, advanced broadcasting technology, and community-focused programming. These improvements, the filing emphasized, would reach audiences for free over the air, distinguishing the merged entity from paid multichannel video services.
The opposition brief highlighted sweeping changes in the media industry since the early 1990s, when Congress first required cable and satellite distributors to negotiate retransmission consent fees with local broadcasters. Streaming platforms now command more viewing time than traditional broadcast and cable combined, according to industry data cited in the document. Digital video advertising has captured half of total media spending in the first half of 2025, up from 15 percent in 2017, while local television’s share has fallen below 6 percent. Nexstar contended that these shifts have eroded traditional revenue streams for local stations, making scale and operational efficiencies essential for survival.
Nexstar and TEGNA overlap in only 35 markets, the filing noted, and the combined company would compete more effectively against large technology platforms that have siphoned audiences and advertising dollars. The deal would integrate TEGNA’s digital advertising platform to offer advertisers broader reach and would provide TEGNA stations with access to Nexstar’s Washington, D.C., news bureau and 24 state capital bureaus. It would also accelerate the rollout of next-generation ATSC 3.0 broadcast technology to stations not yet equipped for it. Regulators at the Federal Communications Commission approved the transaction in March 2026, concluding that it would promote localism, diversity, and competition while requiring commitments to increase local journalism hours and programming.
The defendants challenged the plaintiffs’ core claims that the merger would lead to higher retransmission fees and reduced local news quality. They asserted that broadcasters and distributors negotiate across entire national footprints rather than market by market, that contracts typically last three years or longer with staggered expiration dates, and that many distributors already secure network programming directly from the Big Four networks without relying on local affiliates. Consumers, the filing added, can access Nexstar and TEGNA stations free over the air at any time, limiting any potential impact from future rate disputes.
DIRECTV, which faces contract renewals with Nexstar later in 2026, was portrayed as using litigation to gain negotiating leverage rather than addressing immediate consumer harm. The states alleged future price increases for cable and satellite subscribers, but Nexstar countered that no evidence demonstrated an imminent threat. The brief stressed that preliminary injunctions require proof of specific, immediate, and irreparable injury, a standard the plaintiffs had not met because their arguments relied on generalized predictions rather than verified facts tied to this transaction.
Nexstar further argued that the proposed geographic and product markets advanced by the plaintiffs were outdated and ignored competitive pressures from streaming services. The Federal Communications Commission had reviewed similar concerns during its approval process and rejected a backward-looking analysis, finding that the merger’s pro-competitive benefits outweighed any speculative risks. The filing also noted that the merger would not reduce the number of independent local news voices in any market and that federal obligations would require the combined company to expand, not diminish, local content.
If the court grants an injunction, the defendants warned, local stations would lose immediate access to planned investments in journalism and infrastructure, harming communities that rely on free over-the-air television for emergency alerts and daily news. The balance of equities, they concluded, favored allowing the merger to proceed while the underlying antitrust case continues through normal litigation. The brief asked the judge to deny the motions for injunctive relief outright and to require the plaintiffs to post a substantial bond if any relief were granted.
The case remains pending before Judges Troy L. Nunley and Carolyn K. Delaney in the Eastern District of California. Industry observers expect the ruling on the injunction to influence how quickly Nexstar can begin realizing the operational and journalistic upgrades outlined in its regulatory commitments.
Please add Cord Cutters News as a source for your Google News feed HERE. Please follow us on Facebook and X for more news, tips, and reviews. Need cord cutting tech support? Join our Cord Cutting Tech Support Facebook Group for help.